MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287027976 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.03129

Accurate simulation of operating system updates in neuroimaging using\n Monte-Carlo arithmetic

2021· preprint· W4287027976 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodPipeline (software)NeuroimagingStability (learning theory)Human Connectome ProjectSoftwareComputational scienceAlgorithmData miningMachine learningMathematicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Operating system (OS) updates introduce numerical perturbations that impact\nthe reproducibility of computational pipelines. In neuroimaging, this has\nimportant practical implications on the validity of computational results,\nparticularly when obtained in systems such as high-performance computing\nclusters where the experimenter does not control software updates. We present a\nframework to reproduce the variability induced by OS updates in controlled\nconditions. We hypothesize that OS updates impact computational pipelines\nmainly through numerical perturbations originating in mathematical libraries,\nwhich we simulate using Monte-Carlo arithmetic in a framework called "fuzzy\nlibmath" (FL). We applied this methodology to pre-processing pipelines of the\nHuman Connectome Project, a flagship open-data project in neuroimaging. We\nfound that FL-perturbed pipelines accurately reproduce the variability induced\nby OS updates and that this similarity is only mildly dependent on simulation\nparameters. Importantly, we also found between-subject differences were\npreserved in both cases, though the between-run variability was of comparable\nmagnitude for both FL and OS perturbations. We found the numerical precision in\nthe HCP pre-processed images to be relatively low, with less than 8 significant\nbits among the 24 available, which motivates further investigation of the\nnumerical stability of components in the tested pipeline. Overall, our results\nestablish that FL accurately simulates results variability due to OS updates,\nand is a practical framework to quantify numerical uncertainty in neuroimaging.\n

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.122 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it